Topic: No word on Star Trek XI...

[Lieutenant_Q]

...but this does raise a question or three.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081015/media_nm/us_paramount_2

[Pestalence_XC]

According to the Official site.. they have 2 release dates shown.. the main page shows May 8, 2009 release date, however the browser tab shows May 30, 2009 release date..

No mention of cancellation.. especially since so much money has already been spent on the movie.. Filming IIRC is complete.. it is in the Cutting room and CGI departments currently .. Music and Audio will be added after that.. should be complete in advance of May 30.. however they may not make the May 8th release date shown on the site currently, which is why the tab is showing a different "In Theatres" date.

I do not believe that Paramount will can ST XI.. they have already invested so much money and almost 2 1/4 years into ST XI production.

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

That's garbage. No issues with the new trek movie.  A new trailer with footage of the ship and cast from the movie will be out in november. For news on the movie check:

 trekmovie.com

look at a picture of the uss kelvin in battle.

[Pestalence_XC]

I'm going by the Official site set up by Paramount..

www.startrekmovie.com

or you can look in the official forums

www.startrekmovie.com/forums

when you go to the first link.. you will see the advertised release date.. but look at your browser tab and put your mouse over it.. it will say "In Theaters May 30, 2009" where as the main page states May 8, 2009 .. so the movie may yet be delayed again.. the original release date was suppose to be Dec. 2008 and got pushed back because of Abrams working on that other movie last year...

Anyhow terkmovie.com is a good site for investigating the making of the movie and spoilers.. however you have to keep in mind that 40% of what they post, especially images, are fan created and 60% of articles are pure speculation.. Abrams has attempted to keep a lid on most information of the movie.. some stuff has leaked but not a lot.

So I still rather stick with the official site...

[dragoon]

They've released a shot of the USS Kelvin..

http://trekweb.com/articles/2008/10/16/Entertaiment-Weekly-Reveals-Spoilers-for-the-Movie-Plus-New-Photo-of-the-USS-Kelvin.shtml

I like the design.

[Lieutenant_Q]

NCC - 0514?

Shouldn't that be NCC - 514?  What's up with the leading zero?

Ship looks nice, but I have to wonder if Abrahms has any clue to Star Trek.

[Corbomite]

NCC - 0514?

Shouldn't that be NCC - 514?  What's up with the leading zero?

Ship looks nice, but I have to wonder if Abrahms has any clue to Star Trek.

Like everyone else that has helmed it in recent years, he wants to "reboot" it... whatever that means. The first Trek he ever saw was TMP and he wasn't impressed. He's more into Star Wars.

[Roychipoqua_Mace]

The visuals for the film, including the fiery Kelvin in battle, look nice. I think they have too much CGI, though. The TMP-series models were perfect - enough detail to stand out from TOS, but not so much as to be overwhelming. It just seems that now that things are all computer-generated, the animators get too bogged down in little details. As another example, comparing the original Star Wars trilogy with its special effects to the second trilogy: it's hard to describe how the CG starship effects are different, they just look off.

I could only hope that big Hollywood productions go back to models, but I can't see that happening. Maybe in a few years, animators will have the technology to make a simpler style that looks more realistic.

[Lieutenant_Q]

Best example with Star Wars.  Compare the Imperial Walkers in The Empire Strikes Back, to the Republic Walkers at the end of uh...whatever that POS II was called.

[knightstorm]

This film is gonna suck.  I can honestly say that this will. the first trek film that I haven't seen in theaters since I was 7.  I may watch it on DVD, but there is no way I am going to shell out $15 to watch it on the big screen.

[dragoon]

This film is gonna suck.  I can honestly say that this will. the first trek film that I haven't seen in theaters since I was 7.  I may watch it on DVD, but there is no way I am going to shell out $15 to watch it on the big screen.

I don't see how you can make that judgement based on what we know... I thought apart from First Contact, TNG films sucked, and I think that only Wrath of Khan and undiscovered country were good.. So really, only 3 out of 10 films were even worth watching.... granted Trek 4 was amusing, but not worth a cinema viewing.

This is a $150 million film, that is making an effort to put some life into something that's been on slow death for 10 or more so years.

I for one will see this in the cinema. If it's a load of crap, then shame on me for going to see it, but if it is brilliant, then I would have had the joy of seeing it on the big screen... however, what I pay for my local cinema is about $7.80, so it's not a big loss.

I for one am generally excited about it, and thankful that they're willing to throw out some " canon ".... a term which has never really been consistent anyway.
The whole thing of people frothing at the mouth because some minor "fact" has changed is stupid in the extreme. ( not saying that's your reason though )

I wen to see Keanu Reeves film Street Kings a few months back.... I thought it would be a load of rubbish, but I went because my friend had nobody to see it with that week. And I really enjoyed it.

I think the problem with a lot of Trek Fans is that, they are afraid that this will be bad and spoil something important to them. It's understandable... but I don't care about the old fans. I want this to gain a massive new following, what with Children being the future and all that.

[Lieutenant_Q]

I can say this.  I Absolutely HATE the new Bridge.

Is that going to keep me from watching it?  No.

[knightstorm]

This film is gonna suck.  I can honestly say that this will. the first trek film that I haven't seen in theaters since I was 7.  I may watch it on DVD, but there is no way I am going to shell out $15 to watch it on the big screen.

I for one am generally excited about it, and thankful that they're willing to throw out some " canon ".... a term which has never really been consistent anyway.
The whole thing of people frothing at the mouth because some minor "fact" has changed is stupid in the extreme. ( not saying that's your reason though )

I wen to see Keanu Reeves film Street Kings a few months back.... I thought it would be a load of rubbish, but I went because my friend had nobody to see it with that week. And I really enjoyed it.

I think the problem with a lot of Trek Fans is that, they are afraid that this will be bad and spoil something important to them. It's understandable... but I don't care about the old fans. I want this to gain a massive new following, what with Children being the future and all that.

The problem is that I don't think that hack Abrams wants to throw out "some cannon."  Generally all of the movies have been watchable, and even Nemesis is better than that drivel that Lucas was busy churning out at the time.  A few such as 2, 6, and 8 were masterpieces.  I'm also afraid that in addition to dumping cannon, Abrams might try to pervert Star Trek into some sort of flash gordonesque type thing.  These fears are based on the teaser which shows the Enterprise being built planetside, and the warp nacelles which appear to have tail fins.

[dragoon]

I just don't see why the ship having slight fins and being built on a planet should mean the film will suck.
Everything i've read, and all that has been said by those working on the film, haev said that they've kept as much cannon as possible, and even refered back to some of the various books too.... Aparently they even adopted aspects of the Romulan Lanuage from the series of Rhianssu books.

In the end, none of us can really judge the film until we see it.... but for me, i will see it in the cinema, because if I don't and it turns out to be brilliant, I will regret that I never took the chance when it was. Of course if it's crap, i'll regret going.....
But the Trek is supposed to be positive, so I will be too.   

[Corbomite]

I don't care what anyone says, I like ST III. It has a lot of funny moments, good McCoy lines "How can you be deaf with ears like that!" "That green blooded SOB! This is payback for all those arguments he lost!" and Christopher Lloyd is the best Klingon ever. He set the template for all TNG Klingons. Kirk's scene with Sarek is also really well done.

[dragoon]

I don't care what anyone says, I like ST III. It has a lot of funny moments, good McCoy lines "How can you be deaf with ears like that!" "That green blooded SOB! This is payback for all those arguments he lost!" and Christopher Lloyd is the best Klingon ever. He set the template for all TNG Klingons. Kirk's scene with Sarek is also really well done.

Maybe I was a bit harsh about the trek films.... what I meant was that only 3 of them I feel are worth seeing in the cinema.
When their on TV, then they naturally get watched

I actually look forward to remastered/Blu ray versions of them.

[Roychipoqua_Mace]

I don't care what anyone says, I like ST III. It has a lot of funny moments, good McCoy lines "How can you be deaf with ears like that!" "That green blooded SOB! This is payback for all those arguments he lost!" and Christopher Lloyd is the best Klingon ever. He set the template for all TNG Klingons. Kirk's scene with Sarek is also really well done.

ST3 is a lot of fun, so many great scenes. Do you remember the Seinfeld episode where Kramer and Jerry argue over which Star Trek movie is the best (Kramer for III, Jerry for II), and Kramer meditates on his 'katra' to defeat little kids in Karate?

For some reason, my favorite Trek film is The Motion Picture. Each time I watch it or even think about it, the more I like it. The novelization by Roddenberry is supposed to be better than the film, so I will give that a try.

[Vipre]

ST:II and III seem like halves of a whole to me and storywise with ST:IV you could call it a "Death and Rebirth of Spock" trilogy.

[knightstorm]

I just don't see why the ship having slight fins and being built on a planet should mean the film will suck.

It represents a style of storyline which is directly opposed to what Star Trek is.  One of the reasons why Star Trek was so memorable was that it broke away from earlier conventions in science fiction.  Now Abrams wants to drag it back to them.

Everything i've read, and all that has been said by those working on the film, haev said that they've kept as much cannon as possible, and even refered back to some of the various books too.... Aparently they even adopted aspects of the Romulan Lanuage from the series of Rhianssu books.

Books aren't cannon.  Especially ones like the Rihansu series which was started so long ago, that cannon has diverged very far away from it.

[Dash Jones]

ST:II and III seem like halves of a whole to me and storywise with ST:IV you could call it a "Death and Rebirth of Spock" trilogy.

Does this mean that V-VII are the Death of Kirk Trilogy?  Where Kirk says he knows he's going to die alone in V....has problems in VI...and then disappears alone...and brought back and then dies in VII?